<p>Reduction in apathy following epilepsy surgery</p>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Surgical treatment for patients with epilepsy who do not respond to antiepileptic medication can lead to changes in behavior, including new onset of neuropsychiatric symptoms such as depression and anxiety. In other cases, neuropsychiatric symptoms present before surgery may be alleviated. Because application of diagnostic criteria for primary psychiatric disorders may not be valid in assessing behavior in epilepsy populations, we sought to determine the feasibility of measuring behaviors associated with frontal-subcortical dysfunction using the Frontal Systems Behavior Scale (FrSBe) in patients who had received surgical intervention for medically refractory epilepsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-three patients who had previously undergone epilepsy surgery and their family member informants completed the FrSBe. The FrSBe includes separate forms for patients and informants to rate symptoms associated with three frontal lobe syndromes - executive dysfunction, disinhibition, and apathy - prior to and following a neurological condition. Patients and informants were asked to rate frontal lobe behaviors before and after epilepsy surgery using the FrSBe. RESULTS: Informants rated patients as showing a significantly greater reduction in apathy on the FrSBe compared to either disinhibition or executive dysfunction subscales. A trend in reduction of apathy following right hemisphere resection was found. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who have undergone epilepsy surgery show a reduction in apathy but it is unclear whether this behavioral change is directly related to the surgical intervention. We suggest that these preliminary findings support the utility of implementing dimensional scales such as the FrSBe to study behavioral changes following epilepsy surgery.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".